I got a surprise this morning: a new 12-marker match. I know, 12 markers don't necessarily mean much, but this guy has my surname.

The match is dated 03 October 2012, but I didn't get an email about it from FTDNA. That has happened before, however. It's funny, because I get emails all the time when members of my various projects get 12-marker matches. Oh, well. I check my matches periodically, anyway, so I am not dependent on email notifications.

It's just 12 markers, but it's still pretty exciting. I hope this man (or the female behind his testing) is really interested in genetic genealogy. Of course, I also hope he turns out to be a y line relative of mine, and I hope he has loads of info I don't have.

BTW, I have an exact 37-marker match with a second cousin once removed that started out just this way, as a surprise 12-marker match. Unfortunately, he didn't have any more information than I had, but it was good to get the match and make contact with a y line relative I didn't know before.

I hope the 12 markers in this case are just the first installment of a 67-marker or 111 marker test. That would be nice.

BTW, I have an exact 37-marker match with a second cousin once removed that started out just this way, as a surprise 12-marker match. Unfortunately, he didn't have any more information than I had, but it was good to get the match and make contact with a y line relative I didn't know before.

I hope the 12 markers in this case are just the first installment of a 67-marker or 111 marker test. That would be nice.

12 markers mean more to you, as they do to me -- because of the wacky off-modal you have at DYS385ab. Even within DF41 that's highly uncommon, and Europe wasn't peopled by DF41. It's a lucky happenstance when some of your craziest stuff happens within the first 12 markers that are checked in the most basic test. Keeps you from being inundated by thousands of almost meaningless "matches" with the WAMH or whatever.

12 markers mean more to you, as they do to me -- because of the wacky off-modal you have at DYS385ab. Even within DF41 that's highly uncommon, and Europe wasn't peopled by DF41. It's a lucky happenstance when some of your craziest stuff happens within the first 12 markers that are checked in the most basic test. Keeps you from being inundated by thousands of almost meaningless "matches" with the WAMH or whatever.

On the other side of the coin, I have three off-modals from P312 (WAMH) on my first 12 markers. Two turned out to be red herrings in the sense they were very recent. The third turned out to be important but it took me a 67 upgrade to figure that out after putting some money on advanced STRs and some other things that weren't really useful.

You don't know what you don't know.

Back to your side of the coin, having the same surname is big so that's a trail worth exhausting. Congratulations!

12 markers mean more to you, as they do to me -- because of the wacky off-modal you have at DYS385ab. Even within DF41 that's highly uncommon, and Europe wasn't peopled by DF41. It's a lucky happenstance when some of your craziest stuff happens within the first 12 markers that are checked in the most basic test. Keeps you from being inundated by thousands of almost meaningless "matches" with the WAMH or whatever.

On the other side of the coin, I have three off-modals from P312 (WAMH) on my first 12 markers. Two turned out to be red herrings in the sense they were very recent.

But Rich's off-modal at 385 is not recent. Hans already dated it 1300 years old; and it's only been found in four or five surnames, one being Stevens. Even if the 1300 should have a big sigma, plus or minus 400 years or whatever, it's not recent enough to trivialize because of some statistical possibility of its being found elsewhere in the human population.

12 markers are exactly why I question the mutation rate calculations, posted by FTDNA. I have two exact 12 marker matches in Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein, which are oddly 400 miles to the North of where my paternal ancestors are from.

However they are R1b1a2a1a1b4, L21 . Surely distance of L21 to Z2105* must greater than 28 generations, posted at FTDNA, or the flipside 5.7% chance of not branching from the same line, and not being related at all, only a coincidence that we match.

BTW, I have an exact 37-marker match with a second cousin once removed that started out just this way, as a surprise 12-marker match. Unfortunately, he didn't have any more information than I had, but it was good to get the match and make contact with a y line relative I didn't know before.

I hope the 12 markers in this case are just the first installment of a 67-marker or 111 marker test. That would be nice.

12 markers mean more to you, as they do to me -- because of the wacky off-modal you have at DYS385ab. Even within DF41 that's highly uncommon, and Europe wasn't peopled by DF41. It's a lucky happenstance when some of your craziest stuff happens within the first 12 markers that are checked in the most basic test. Keeps you from being inundated by thousands of almost meaningless "matches" with the WAMH or whatever.

That's true, but it's mainly the shared surname in my case that makes this less likely to be a coincidence or convergence.

I do have some 12-marker matches who are R-L48 or R-L47, so I have to be careful. It's that darned 390=23 thing.

12 markers are exactly why I question the mutation rate calculations, posted by FTDNA. I have two exact 12 marker matches in Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein, which are oddly 400 miles to the North of where my paternal ancestors are from.

However they are R1b1a2a1a1b4, L21 . Surely distance of L21 to Z2105* must greater than 28 generations, posted at FTDNA, or the flipside 5.7% chance of not branching from the same line, and not being related at all, only a coincidence that we match.

12 markers are exactly why I question the mutation rate calculations, posted by FTDNA. I have two exact 12 marker matches in Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein, which are oddly 400 miles to the North of where my paternal ancestors are from.

However they are R1b1a2a1a1b4, L21 . Surely distance of L21 to Z2105* must greater than 28 generations, posted at FTDNA, or the flipside 5.7% chance of not branching from the same line, and not being related at all, only a coincidence that we match.

Same surname?

No, my last name is Slavic, the 2 of us match with a M. from Denmark[unlisted] at 12 markers. Briskey from Rhine, is also of by one at 12 with me but he clusters with Callsen.[12_24_14_ 10_11-14_12_12_11_14_13_31] [L21+] P312+ M222- N23447 William Briskey, b.1813, Hesse Darmstadt, Germany 225229 Peter Callsen, b. 1776 and d. 1845 GermanyCallsen does match me on 8/8 slow mutating markers,13/17 medium mutating[4 non matches are of by 1], but only 2/10 fast mutating markers. Like I said they are in L21+ and I'm z2105* so not sure what to make of it. Perhaps there was a split in the line somewhere in this region along time ago.

Excellent! You deserve some breaks. I had a 10/12 match a few years ago with a same surname chap, but I initially virtually ignored him as I had so many better matches in the 37 & 67 marker zones. However, the 10/12 testee upgraded to 111 markers & we ended up at 105/111 - closer than many of my 11/12 & 12/12, 34/37 & 63/67 earlier matches!Fingers crossed!Bob

I got a new match last week. First one in almost a year. Definitely in the 1111EE group. Exact at 12 markers, 2 GD at 25 markers, but does not show up at 37 markers so maybe 5 GD which is not promising unless he is a Levite. Have not contacted him yet, but will.

I got a new match last week. First one in almost a year. Definitely in the 1111EE group. Exact at 12 markers, 2 GD at 25 markers, but does not show up at 37 markers so maybe 5 GD which is not promising unless he is a Levite. Have not contacted him yet, but will.

I hope you have better luck with this new match of yours than I have had with the match I started this thread about. I still have never heard from the man.

it's frustrating when someone doesn't reply.Perhaps they don't check their email?..or your emails go to their "junk"? You'd think after spending their money on testing they would want to know as much as possible. I have a 12/12 match with another O'Connor and after a brief exchange of emails where I voluteered my genealogy, he refused to give me any information on his family and geographic location.

it's frustrating when someone doesn't reply.Perhaps they don't check their email?..or your emails go to their "junk"? You'd think after spending their money on testing they would want to know as much as possible. I have a 12/12 match with another O'Connor and after a brief exchange of emails where I voluteered my genealogy, he refused to give me any information on his family and geographic location.